Subject: [sv-ec] FW: Neil's comments
From: David W. Smith (david.smith@synopsys.com)
Date: Thu Apr 10 2003 - 21:42:03 PDT
Neil,
Here are Arturo's response to Items 40 and 41 of Neil's review.
No change coming from them.
Regards
David
-----Original Message-----
From: Arturo Salz [mailto:salz@Synopsys.COM]
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 6:53 PM
To: David W. Smith
Subject: Re: Neil's comments
No. The first item doesn't need an example.
The second item next() doesn't specify what happens when doing next on the
last item. This could be implemented with wrap-around or it could return the
same (end-of-list), but basically it's not defined.
Arturo
----- Original Message -----
From: David W. <mailto:david.smith@synopsys.COM> Smith
To: 'Arturo Salz' <mailto:Arturo.Salz@synopsys.COM>
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 3:07 PM
Subject: Neil's comments
Can you decide if you want to do anything about these?
40. Annex C
Some of these methods discuss a wrap-around condition. It would be nice to
have an example that shows this in detail (e.g. C.5.14).
41. Annex C, page 326, C.4.1
I assume that the next() method stops at the end of the list and won't
wrap-around. The text doesn't state the behavior in this case.
Thanks
Regards
David
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Apr 10 2003 - 21:40:16 PDT